Moneygall man wins appeal after legal papers sent to ‘wrong county’

Martin Murray can now contest €72,000 judgment over fuel bill from Corrib Oil

A man can contest a €72,000 High Court judgment against him for a fuel bill following a Court of Appeal finding there were errors over his address – including whether it was in Co Offaly or Co Tipperary.

Martin Murray, of Crimlin Little, Moneygall, Co Tipperary, claimed the address which the oil company used to sue him did not exist.

Corrib Oil had sent legal papers to “Crimblin, Moneygall, Co Offaly”, and he claimed there was “no such address in Ireland”.

He said as a result of not receiving the papers, he did not turn up in court when the judgment was entered against him on September 28th, 2011 in favour of Corrib Oil in default of any appearance by him.

READ MORE

Wrong address

He asked the High Court to set aside that judgment on the basis he had not received the legal papers due to the wrong address.

In the High Court, Mr Justice Max Barrett found as “overwhelmingly likely to be true” Corrib Oil’s sworn statement all the necessary documents were delivered to Mr Murray’s home.

Moneygall is a small village whose environs, if not the village itself, straddle Tipperary and Offaly, the judge said.

It “defies belief” post addressed to Moneygall, Co Offaly, would not, and did not, arrive at Moneygall, Co Tipperary, he also said.

Mr Murray appealed that decision and a three-judge Court of Appeal upheld his appeal.

‘Hesitation’

Mr Justice Gerard Hogan, on behalf of the appeal court, said it had decided to allow the appeal “with not a little hesitation and with considerable sympathy for the position of Corrib Oil”.

The company can now bring its original judgment proceedings again as there was no doubt Mr Murray is now fully aware and properly served with the papers, he said.

Mr Murray will have to file any defence to those proceedings within four weeks, he added.

Given the importance of ensuring proper service of legal documents, particularly when a default judgment is sought, the court “must err on the side of caution”, he said.